Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[Andy_Ross]

Treat this thread with care.
Itta rarity these days.

Most conspiracists seen to have moved on to exposing the cover up of the Tartarian Empire, Great Mud Flood and fake history.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Foster Zygote, the problem with your method of debate is that you keep making sweeping generalisations and stereotypes based on pure assumption. For example, your obvious belief I must be a bimbo and have no idea how to use a sophisticated camera. Please stop pigeonholing.

The camera that you know how to use, despite being unable to tell us the settings you used to "easily" photograph stars in a way that the Apollo crews should have been able to do?

And stop trying to characterize opposition to your inept arguments an issue with your gender. It's not. You're just trying to play the victim to distract from your ignorance and errors.

 

[Vixen]

No, Vixen, you're not the smartest person in the room.

I didn't say I was. If someone keeps describing one, say, as a seven-foot Columbian hairdresser in Cuban heels with the obvious intent of degrading you, you are quite justified in objectively and factually setting the record straight. I didn't say I was better than anyone else. But imagine the difference between a three-year-old and an eighteen-year-old. One cannot see their own limitation or outside their own worldview whereas the other will realise some things are beyond the former's ken.

 

[Vixen]

In that scenario it's clear that you are the little child believing in Father Christmas, and JayUtah et al are the ones who would be justified in giving up and quietly tiptoeing out of the room. Their patience in trying to disabuse you of your childish notions never ceases to amaze me.

I don't think hero-worship is at all useful.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen, every one of your arguments against the moon landings is based on ignorance or misunderstandings of basic science, mostly gleaned from moronic conspiracy theories and swallowed uncritically.

And when I say basic science I mean early high school level.

I teach this stuff to 13 and 14 year olds, and most of them have no problem understanding it.

O-Level Physics was far harder than anything people do today.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Anyhoo the big rotund orange one has signed an Executive Order that the US must be back on the Moon by 2028, presumably, so he can bask in the glory. We know this guy is not the sharpest card in the pack and he probably believes what his eyes saw in 1969. Okaaaaayyyy.

Giving examples of how that guy has a better grasp of reality than you do is not the flex you think it is.

 

[Vixen]

Pathetic.

Vixen, why did you lie about a “dusty old Hasselblad” have being found in Neil Armstrong’s possession? You repeated this lie after being corrected that the article you attempted to cite for this lie did not say anything about any Hasselblad, never mind containing the implied quote. Yet you stated it, cited an article that said no such thing about any Hasselblad, and repeated the lie after it was pointed out to you.

Why? Pathetic and dishonest.

Why did you state at the beginning of this thread that you believe that the moon landings indisputably happened as described, if you’re now just flailing about with this kind of foaming at the mouth conspiracy ranting?

It was an anecdote..? And of course, Armstrong's belongings found in a cupboard after his death by his second wife WERE put on display in a space museum (excluding the rumoured Hasselblad), things he was supposed to have left on the Moon, so there is a grain of substance to that urban myth.

 

[JayUtah]

O-Level Physics was far harder than anything people do today.

Irrelevant. You have absolutely no discernible competence in physics. You are stumbling over elementary concepts—the kind literally taught to children. In any case, professional engineering is far harder than O-Level physics. I am qualified in that and you are not.

 

[JesseCuster]

O-Level Physics was far harder than anything people do today.

Irrelevant as far as you’re concerned. You apparently did not understand, absorb and/or remember your 5 years of physics studies. Especially when you come out with howlers like the quote I couldn’t help but put into my signature.

 

[JayUtah]

It was an anecdote..? And of course, Armstrong's belongings found in a cupboard after his death by his second wife WERE put on display in a space museum (excluding the rumoured Hasselblad), things he was supposed to have left on the Moon, so there is a grain of substance to that urban myth.

It was not a Hasselblad. It was never claimed to be a Hasselblad. You are the only one trying to identify as one because you don't know what a Hasselblad 500/EL looks like.

 

[Vixen]

Also, please explain what you were getting at when you asked about taking so and so much ~120 photos at 1.5 seconds each in the space of 2.5 hours and asked if the maths worked. Please “do the math” for me and explain what you’re trying to argue. I don’t think you can.

Edit: this post is the one I’d like explained: With specifics remember, you’re a numbers person and this should be easy to explain.

The argument is that the shutter speed of the cameras used means they must have been churning out a photo every Xth of a unit of time.

 

[JayUtah]

I don't think hero-worship is at all useful.

Your own sources cite to me as an expert.

 

[JayUtah]

The argument is that the shutter speed of the cameras used means they must have been churning out a photo every Xth of a unit of time.

Which they did.

 

[JesseCuster]

It was an anecdote..?

What was an anecdote? The article you referenced wasn’t an anecdote. Your referencing of the article wasn’t an anecdote. What was the anecdote that excuses your repeated falsehood about a “dusty old Hasselblad” being found to have ben in Armstrong’s possession?

And of course, Armstrong's belongings found in a cupboard after his death by his second wife WERE put on display in a space museum (excluding the rumoured Hasselblad), things he was supposed to have left on the Moon, so there is a grain of substance to that urban myth.

What rumoured Hasselblad? You mean the rumour/lie you made up about a “dusty old Hasselblad”? You’re excusing your lies because there’s a grain of truth to some BS rumour (that you appear to be the only source of) about a “dusty old Hasselblad” being found in Neil Armstrong’s belongings?

Unsubstantiated conspiracy theorist rumours. This the properly cited and referenced sources you claim all your posts are factually based on? Laughable.

 

[Vixen]

Or maybe somebody just does not get the diffrence between weight and mass....

Yeah, let's all pretend I'm the stupid one. I get this means a lot to our US friends and I honestly have no intention of pricking anyone's fondly held beliefs.

 

[Vixen]

It confused me for a long time as a schoolkid because we so routinely informally use mass units to describe weight.

I never had any problem understanding the difference.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I never had any problem understanding the difference.

So you were just pretending.

 

[Pixel42]

I don't think hero-worship is at all useful.

How useful do you think wilful ignorance, refusal to learn and delusions of adequacy are?

 

[GlennB]

Yeah, let's all pretend I'm the stupid one. I get this means a lot to our US friends and I honestly have no intention of pricking anyone's fondly held beliefs.

You've demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding of the difference between mass and weight. It's documented here in black and white. You have no complaints about being misrepresented. What's more, you've laughed at people who corrected you.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Yeah, let's all pretend I'm the stupid one.

"Pretend", sure. We could make a list of stuff you've got wrong, sometimes multiple times, but we don't need to because already a large part of the thread is devoted to that.